Bouchard-Taylor in Montreal. Report from the field.

I have been a fervent critic of the Bouchard-Taylor commission. Tonight I changed my mind. I did not see a racist and bigoted forum, but rather a gathering of mostly well-educated and respectful people who wanted to share their success stories or their tribulations with a commission that has heard enough drivel and was probably relieved to hear some decency.

The testimonies were varied, ranging from the ostracism against anyone who wasn’t a native Quebecer with a French-sounding surname to stories of community involvement by church groups that foster cooperation. One point that kept cropping up was whether the crisis really existed. Many speakers speculated that the whole reasonable accommodation debate was being fuelled for political gain. I agree.

Biggest groups: Church representatives telling about projects, Anglophones telling stories of discrimination (if anglos face discrimination, imagine the immigrants), students who were the most open-minded of the bunch, Quebecers who focused on the language and how it might serve to unite Quebec society even more if it were made the only public language. Overall a solid bunch of folks who didn’t want to shut up and who MOSTLY expressed commonsensical views.

However, the platformists were there. First a Mohawk woman ranted about colonialism and holocausts and whatnot. She had a point, bit it was buried under a pile of rhetoric. Then came anti-Zionists, anti-Afghanistan mission people, you mention it. Was quite fun.

Some vaguely unsettling remarks were overheard by yours truly, a sign that even in a bunch of seemingly educated people something’s lurking. However I did not witness the overt racism and bigotry that characterized other meetings chez les francophones.

Taylor’s concluding remarks were a bit incomplete (one has to stick to the key ones) but were nevertheless strong. Fostering familiarity and communication will decrease fear and distrust, aboriginal rights are not in the mandate of the Commission and thus will be left out of the final report and, most importantly, the system of immigration and employment is in trouble because Quebec (as far as I can remember) has the worst record in Canada for immigrant unemployment.

True to my free market and individualism beliefs, I spoke about accommodation being a personal business, which people must be left to do at their own discretion. Discrimination doesn’t pay, and those who discriminate will lose business, lose connections and lose money. It is not up to the government to impose behavior models beyond the ones governing civilized coexistence in abidance of the Law.

Before I placed no hope in the commission, now I just wish they’ll have both the courage and the commonsense to say that any solution has to be a two-way road. Quebecers (those who are ignorant) need to be educated that there’s a wider world beyond their borders and one can’t prosper in isolation. Immigrants need to be taught Canada’s laws and history (that’s where values are enshrined, right?). And society must be left to adjust itself as it sees fit.

I will post a transcript (sort of) of my speech tomorrow morning.

What's the talk about?

Quebec's Jean Charest nags for a conference to discuss the recent rise in the value of the loonie against the US Dollar. What this would result in is another big wonk talking shop. The Premier's concerns for his province's exports are legitimate, but what can Stephen Harper do? This sounds like dragging a political opponent at federal level into a debate that shouldn't be held.

Firstly concerns about the currency should be addressed by the market. A rising loonie was fuelled by the turmoils in the US economy as well as the rising costs of oil. The tempest has passed, and the two currencies are approaching parity again. What's the urgency?

Secondly, despite the Premiers and the Prime Minister presiding over the respective executives, financial and trade matters are better discussed by the portfolio owners, the (duh) finance and trade ministers.

Thirdly, the Bank of Canada belongs to the federal government, but this is no excuse to see it as an all-encompassing solution for all the economic woes. The current loonie surge is helping Canadian manufacturers realize that competitiveness isn't something they can take for granted. Surely this sudden shift couldn't be predicted or budgeted for. I am however sure that the overall consequences of this shock will be beneficial for the country's competitiveness.

The same cannot be said for the consequences of a government intervention, be it tinkering with the interest rate, dumping or bailing out manufacturers. Charest's Liberals might fancy this kind of economic dealing. I for one do not. I am sure Stephen Harper and his cabinet don't either. As a politician Charest should know this, and no quantity of nagging can do the job of fixing the situation. His time will be better spent finding ways to mitigate the negative consequences of the recent shock and emphasize the positive ones.

Tasers aren't innocent

One more post-Taser death, and a press release from the manufacturer denying all product liability.

I am not surprised by the fact that the company that manufactures these devices (and reaps big profits) denies all responsibility and draws attention to the fact it never lost a product liability lawsuit. They're just doing their job, but their manipulation of reality is pretty self-evident.
The fact that Robert Dziekanski kept on convulsing after the jolts is not PROOF that the Taser wasn't the cause of the death. There must be other factors, sure, but they don't cleanse the Taser of all guilt. Guilt-sharing is not absolution. If a person has a weak heart and the Taser jolts make it give up the device is clearly the cause of the death, just as an example.

This kind of equipment is to be used on healthy and strong individuals in cases when immediate incapacitation is the only way to safeguard the incolumity of the officers and the public. Its use should be subject to reasonable regulation and accountability. What the RCMP did at Vancouver airport was nothing short of cruel, and I am disappointed that the image of a Canadian icon be tarnished in this way. But it should serve as a lesson for every police force employing the Taser: it is not a toy, and interfering with control of muscles and nerves is not something to be done lightly.

Using the Taser can have consequences. Sometimes dire. It should be used only in extreme cases and if there's no other solution, in one short jolt. Police forces have their thinking to do, while TASER Inc should behave more responsibly and emphasize the duty to use their device (which is a powerful law-enforcement tool, no doubt) with caution and common sense. Right now their site is a piece of marketing. In the meantime, people die for some reason. This is not the time to play games.

New exams aren't the solution

However one masks and sugar-coats it, every child going through the school system who turns out to be unable to read properly is a mark of failure on the government's record. Labour's motto "Education, education, education" clearly wasn't meant to succeed.

Not so long ago top British academics warned that their institutions had to lower admissions standards to face a growing number of youngsters whose skills were below par. Data regarding GCSEs and A-levels, especially in the sciences and languages, are not encouraging, while easier courses (excuse me, media studies, general studies and the like are easy!) are skyrocketing.

Now the british Tories are planning to introduce a reading assessment for kids leaving primary school. While this might provide more and more statistics, it doesn't tackle the root cause of illiteracy. Campaigning for phonics teaching is just part of the solution.

I remember when I was learning to read and write (in two languages with two different alphabets, mind you!) my family would spend hours helping me and compelling me to exercise, without giving me any rewards for being good but insisting that I absolutely had to be able to read and write properly and know the multiplication tables. I'm saying that because what all politicians need to realize is a very simple reality: the fundamental educational unit in the first years is the family. The school cannot do the impossible if the family neglects the child. Literacy and numeracy start in the home with mom and dad.

Intervention by the Government, as well as the attempt to monopolize people's lives, have limited people's sense of responsibility. Bring education and responsibility back in the family, get the parents involved directly, make them proud of their child's achievements. Tests and exams are either a sieve or a statistics production tool. Good if you want to sieve out the failing kids or have some statistics to wave.

Resources spent on new examinations are better spent on tackling the root causes of the problem. The Tories have the right principles and the right mindset to do this. Creating new exams is a Labour pastime; it's boring, inefficient, costly, stressful and useless.

Unions locked out

This is new music for me. Petro Canada locks out its unionized workers, wow!

Trade unions are just another special interest group, and if we wanted to boil it down to the basics their aim is to obtain more by giving less and not risking. I.e. safe working conditions, high pay, high benefits, less work.

Locking out your potential troublemakers might be a good idea, but "management assuming operations" is just hilarious. If the managers are skilled to operate the plant and actually can make it work the productivity of the workers must have been close to zero. Many managers, however, are not skilled, and I wouldn't want a refinery go kaboom in my city because a white-collared guy tinkered with the wrong buttons and valves.

I just wonder why so often we see both unions and managers entrenched in their positions and refusing to yield an inch. Whatever goes on at PC, I'd like to see both managers and the union face the reality that none of them can get exactly what they want. And be open about it.

Compromise, my dears, compromise. In the meantime, thankfully, I don't own a car, so prices at the pump won't have my blood boiling if they rise.

More emissions efficiency, and bad news from China

Showing yet another positive development in the drive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, a Niagara winery will have its byproducts sent off to a biogas producer, who will extract methane from them rather than letting it seep out from a landfill unused. This methane (worse than carbon dioxide in causing greenhouse effects) will instead be used to produce electricity. If we applied this technique to most food and agricultural byproducts and waste we'd obtain quite a lot of energy, reducing our bills and possibly our emissions.

Sure, upon burning methane we release carbon dioxide. This time, though, it results in some useful energy production in a controlled environment, making emissions control easier.
Whichever side of the climate change debate one is on, putting waste to one last good use is always a good idea, and our wallets might thank us.

On the other hand, Chinese power plant emissions are set to rise by a mind-boggling 60% in the next ten years. So far the biggest CO2 emitters are China and the US, followed by other nations such as Russia, India, South Africa, South Korea and parts of Europe. Clearly any Canadian government effort to curb emissions will be nullified by such surges in a country such as China, which doesn't give a damn about the environment. An efficient emissions market system, created within a framework which China is a member of (UN, WTO just to mention two) could be a stimulus to consider the environment more than just a dump for their filth.

The Reuters article aptly remarks that around 100 major power generating companies account for about 57% of world CO2 emissions. This proves again one point: greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and environmental protection are not something that can be solved with catastrophic predictions, ultimatums, rallies and massive government intervention. It is a majorly economic question, and as such needs to be tackled by clear-headed professionals, engaging in constructive discussion with managers and politicians, finding a mutually satisfying compromise.

Flag-waving hippies, shouting and whining Liberals, pathetic tree-huggers and the like do the debate no good, nor do they seem to drive us towards a solution.

Although an online version does not seem to be available, I really recommend reading the essay by Dwight R. Lee "Environmental versus Political Pollution", contained in the book "The Market Economy: a Reader" by him and James Doti.

Good behaviour can't be bought

Soon well-behaved youth in Vancouver will be receiving rewards for not being naughty. Catchy as it might sound, this idea rests on inherently faulty principles. The reward for good conduct is a just and peaceful society. This is the essence of society itself: the productive co-operation of individuals and families for the common good. Infringement of the social rules leads instead to punishment and sometimes ejection from the social order (jail).

Giving youngsters goodies for being well-behaved is a very simplistic approach to human thinking, because it assumes that the human mind is unable to appreciate the value of abstract concepts such as social peace and prosperity, but is concerned only with personal satisfaction. Thus you teach a whole generation to EXPECT a reward for good conduct.

When they stop getting this reward good conduct will lose its worth in their eyes, and its value will be defined only in terms of avoiding the punishment that is consequential to bad conduct. Either we create a faultless clockwork justice system or society will deteriorate.

Monkey does something funny - monkey gets banana. Monkey makes noise - monkey gets a water jet. What will happen when we run out of bananas?

We have evolved from that stage, and rather than bribing youngsters into good social conduct the schools and parents should inculcate some civic pride and some appreciation for law and mutual benefit.

More Chavez nonsense

Megalomaniac Chavez wants OPEC to get involved in geopolitics and finance social programs in poor nations, as well as help shield weaker nations from high oil prices.

What Mr Chavez fails to realize is that OPEC is a cartel of the worst kind, created for the exact purpose of milking fuel-strapped nations and exploiting the oil market for all its worth. Investment by OPEC in social programs is completely out of the question, since I seriously doubt the Saudis give a damn about poor Venezuelans or any poor nation for that matter.
OPEC using oil revenues to fight poverty makes no sense, since OPEC itself generates poverty and strifles development. Heightening oil prices makes energy and transport expensive, strifling trade, consumption and production. Increasing artificially oil revenues prevents the establishment of a fair free market in energy resources and fuels corrupt governments that have no interest in allowing free trade. In a sense, OPEC is exactly what Mr Chavez wants: all-powerful cartels, destroying the free market, arbitrarily redistributing wealth and revenue and, of course, holding a stranglehold on politics.

Chavez's unawareness of economics and free markets is further emphasized by his assertion that such high oil prices should be maintained for several years, while at the same time ensuring that weak nations are not hit by this hike. He wants the best of both worlds but we all know this is impossible. While Venezuela might be scooping the windfall from this oil price bonanza, no-one of their buyers will be happy.

Why doesn't Chavez just shut up and read some economics books? Wealth of Nations?

Public healthcare will cost more

Rising public healthcare costs should be no surprise, with a rising life expectancy and general improvements in techniques and treatment. People live longer, and when their bodies are frailer the cost of healing them rises. According to the same article, per capita spending for those aged 85-89 was four times higher than for those aged 65-69.

Although this is an excellent quality mark for Canada, which is proved to care for its citizens, this part of public spending gobbling up a greater proportion of GDP will be ground for worries in the long term. Unless immigration and Canadian demographics keep propping up the taxpayer army the system will need reform.

Contrary to my usual self-righteous style, I do NOT have a solution to the issue. I merely wish to draw attention to what could become a problem. Despite the US system being frequently cited as the consequence of abandoning public healthcare, nothing is black or white. There are many shades of grey and many hybrid systems that deserve a debate.

Fair trial down the drain

I am all for greater security for all nations. This, however, chills my blood. Barring defendants and lawyers from hearings where testimonies and evidence against them are being presented is nothing more than due process flushed down the toilet.

Protecting intelligence comes with better intelligence, i.e. one uncovers the whole gang rather than just an individual member. Protecting witnesses can be done in other ways, such as sworn declarations and witness protection programs.

I hereby allege that a kitten dies every time Stephane Dion makes a promise. Fearing violent reprisal, I ask that my testimony be heard under Section 86, thus not allowing Dion to know when, where and how he allegedly came to commit the heinous crime of kitten murder. I declare that I am the only person who could know of the when, where and how, therefore revealing such information would lead directly to me, thus Dion shouldn't be informed of these details. However, he should still defend himself and prove that he didn't kill those fluffy creatures.

If this sounds ridiculous to you, Section 86 and security certificates should do too.

Section 86 and Security certificates belong in the same group: laws that shouldn't be. They deprive the individual, whoever he or she may be, of the right to due process and fair trial. When we begin recognizing lower rights for some, we sin against our own rights because they too might be taken away at some point.

Relishing in one's perceived immunity from such measures with the pretexts of "I am a law abiding citizen" and "I have nothing to hide" is fallacious as well. Some day, somewhere it could be YOU. If, while in a foreign country, you or I would ask for due process we must do the same for those facing the Canadian justice and immigration systems, however despicable their beliefs, actions or intents might be.

Kill someone's rights and you kill your own.

Rich should pay. Wrong!

Also Known As "How to get everyone in the developed world to hate the climate change agenda". Except deluded leftie loons, that is.

Reuters brings us the news of a report, drawn up by Christian Aid, that points the finger against industrialized nations, "historically responsible" for global warming and "morally liable" to bear the costs incurred in the eventual cleanup.

How humanitarian, taking the unbearable onus off the shoulders of developing nations (ahem, China included). How fair, finally establishing justice and fairness the world over. How long-sighted, taking into account everything from history to oppression. How stupid!

Such gibberish is exactly what the climate debate doesn't need. Underdeveloped nations wouldn't bear the cost anyway, since there isn't much emission in the first place. What counts is the reduction in PRESENT emissions. Arguing about who should do what (and how much should be paid) based on history lends the debate to complete polarization, resulting in the collapse of whatever framework we could have established earlier.

Thanks Christian Aid, for setting the climate change debate back a thousand eons.

Useless mullings from the UN

Apparently the UN is worried about the human rights of potential human clones, since we are, allegedly, on our way to creating a fully functioning human cloned organism.

I don't know what their sources are, but the difficulties associated with cloning, let alone developing the clone into a full organism are humongous. I really doubt we will have our mirror images walking the street anytime soon.

Moreover, there's no choice to be made. The choice is clear: no reproductive cloning. Tissue cloning is sufficient for creating organs for transplants or creating "reserves" of tissues and cells ready to be used when necessary. Reproductive cloning is the mere flight of fancy of a diseased mind.

The UN should use the money it is given a bit more productively methinks. There are human rights to worry about RIGHT NOW.

Don't endorse Saakashvili!

Backing of their current administration by the USA is the last thing Georgians need today.

Saakashvili has mismanaged the country and turned it into a murky place. Not that it wasn't before his messianic coming, but now the murkiness is in the spotlight. The perpetual straining of relationships with Russia is no positive way to lead a country. Saakashvili probably endorses the neo-conservative enemy mentality, i.e. that there needs to be an enemy for the nation to be united. This is the only basis for such an ill-timed endorsement for such an administration.

The principles behind the Rose Revolution are noble. Sometimes it does happen that the right cause is advocated and pursued by the wrong person. Until we realize this Georgians will suffer.

Liberals inspired by Labour? Run!

Dion quotes poverty figures as an indictment of the Conservative Government, rambles on about how the Liberals will tackle this, gives no detail and mentions Tony Blair as an inspiration (news here). Not giving details of how you will turn the country into the Garden of Eden is not a good tactic, one can't fool all the people all the time.

Beware of the Blair comparison. If any inspiration is drawn from Tony Blair and the Labour Party, the Liberals will transform Canada into a 1984-style party dictatorship with gagged freedom of speech, botched-up multiculturalism, enormous government, a benefit culture and a more ACUTE poverty and inequality problem. If I'm no source to go by, then check out the Institute of Public Policy Research, who have to admit their own mistakes as well.

Liberals want to have this same record? Over my maimed body.

Recipe for disaster

States of emergency after popular dissent seem to be trendy among oppressive nations these days. I will only quote Burma and Pakistan as examples where a power-hungry elite (or individual) just won't recognize that it's time to put itself to the test of public opinion (i.e. vote). Or it won't give in to public pressure to change course.

This trendy dish is typically served with a condiment of media gagging and arrests of oppositioners, mostly by placing them under house arrest or through timely unearthing of allegations of corruption, coup-staging or any other crime. Sprinkles of skillful case-tailoring are supposed to add that aftertaste of legality that no-one really spots, and same goes for other accompaniments of institutional endorsements that smell a little foul.

This dictatorial recipe book is unfortunately still quite popular. What should worry us is the fact that it's being discovered in places that we either placed trust in or that are too close to our borders.

Today Georgia's parliament approved UNANIMOUSLY the state of emergency imposed by president Saakashvili in the wake of brutally dispersed protests against his allegedly dictatorial rule and abuse of justice. I don't think this sounds right. Considering there are arrests of opposition leaders and indictment of a prominent businessman on counts of staging a coup, the picture looks pretty familiar. With elections looming, I doubt anyone can consider them fair if the leaders of the opposition are under investigation, exile or arrest.

I hope to be wrong, but I detect a whiff of farcical politics. The infamous cookbook might be making a comeback. Kindzmarauli wine, anyone?

Eighteen years of freedom

November 9th. Remembrance day for us. Although they don't have Remembrance day over there, for many Germans today is a special day. Exactly eighteen years ago the wall of infamy that signified the brutal and arbitrary division of the two German states came to the end of its bloody existence, as hundreds of people crossed the border. The shadow of communism that was cast over a large part of the world would soon retreat into pockets where it is making its last stance before being definitively dumped into the garbage truck.

Over the decades the redness of Communist flags disguised the spilt blood of its innocent victims. The dramatic testimonies left by the Berlin Wall recount an era or oppression, control and contempt for human life, not least the "shoot to kill" orders.

November 9th is a day to remind us every human being's destiny: to be free. Every human being is driven to freedom and will strive for it and achieve it if given the chance. If one wants to kill this spirit one has to destroy the very essence of human nature. Communism attempted to do this for decades and failed. Today we remember the war dead and the veterans, but we should carve out a space for those free spirits that chose to risk their life escaping oppression over surrender to tyranny.

There are still many walls to bring down, and possibly many victims to be counted before freedom bells peal loud across the globe. Let the spirit of Remembrance day remind us of the heroic actions of our ancestors and of those who defend our countries today. Let the spirit of those who tore down the Berlin wall remind us that freedom is the most precious gift of all, and that no matter which sacrifices one goes through to achieve it, it's worth it.

Clean air doesn't mean higher bills

Something's afoot in our planet. It's right in front of our eyes. Whether one agrees or disagrees with global warming theories, one should see something's changing. Moreover, we know that dumping waste into our environment isn't cool. Although it is a consequence of production, it has to bear a cost.

What many didn't get, as Reuters shows, is that the consumer doesn't need to pay higher bills to contribute to tackling pollution. The notion of consumers agreeing to an increase in energy cost to subsidize industry implementation of pollution-reducing measures is short sighted and fallacious at its roots.

Ever heard of efficiency? Consumers need to focus on REDUCING their energy costs by using energy more wisely. Reduced energy consumption would mean the companies will have to alter their production patterns. Coupled with an elementary carbon emissions market, reduction in production and investment in anti-pollution measures would result in a breakeven for the energy producing companies, who would decrease production and emission and sell the emission rights to those who need them.

An excellent editorial in this month's The Chemical Engineer argues for efficiently far better than I can. I'll try to gain permission to reproduce it.

It is also very amusing to see how China, one of the countries that transforms our planet into a garbage tip, is now blaming global warming for its water shortages. Right, after you've burned enough coal and dumped enough filth into your own air to make smog clouds commonplace you suddenly realize you might have done something wrong. If Communism doesn't make you richer, it certainly dumbs you down and chokes you. When East Germany wanted to compete with used cars from the West it introduced the Trabant, which came to be called the forest-killer in some circles. Guess why.

Improve your environment: Reduce your bills and fight Communism.

Score one for amateur interrogators

Mukasey got the go-ahead to become the US Attorney-General. I understand that sometimes realpolitik has to take over from idealism, but with the US's image tarnished by the many scandals and allegations, giving someone who didn't speak out prominently against torture techniques amounts to nothing else than the mercification of principles for the sake of political stability (avoiding more tension with the White House) and a vague notion of national security that curbs the freedoms of the individuals in ways never seen before.

Don't get me wrong. I'm fine with my library record and whatnot being available to the FBI or the RCMP for the purpose of weeding out potential terrorist recruits being extremized. I am also fine with aggressive interrogation techniques, when these involve well known tried-and-tested methods. Waterboarding and the like are nothing to be proud of, and the information one extorts in this way is in no way legitimate or reliable. Good God, I'd confess anything should I be subjected to something like that.

This man who will soon take one of the top seats in the Bush administration is no better than anyone who preceded him. Quizzed on a question of principle he gave a half answer that wasn't even an answer. This man will not ban any torture technique currently being employed by the US if he comes across it, and I bet a grand to your loonie he will gladly lobby for all laws regarding these practices to be stalled or vetoed, so he won't have to handle the hot potato.

It's about time we all showed some integrity and said no to torture, whatever the cost. My own gut reaction would be to take information out of a terrorist at all costs. Fortunately, my brain is located not in my gut but a tad higher. The rule of law and human rights were made for everyone, and as the bastion of integrity and freedom the West claims to be it must be first in line in their enforcement and maintenance.

Tough questioning and truthful confessions by hardened criminals are the work of professionals. Waterboarding and the like are for amateurs. Mukasey should value professionalism over cheapness, and he hasn't done that. OK-ing Mukasey is a slap in the face of anyone who values human life and dignity. It is also a missed opportunity to really address the lack of real interrogation skills. Come on, interrogation is an art, this was the chance to show that the US values artfully done jobs over cheap made-in-china-style stuff.

Once again, the cheap has it. Don't blame me if it goes awry.

Mea Culpa and Errata Corrigo: Go Benazir!

My life is frequently ironic. Just days ago I blogged on Pakistan's events, interpreting them as bad timing by Benazir Bhutto, since a stable situation was required to counter a resurgent extremism. Today I admit my mistake and give my full support for Bhutto's struggle to free her country from the grip of a power-addicted nut. This statement she released to CNN finds me in perfect agreement.

Musharraf's latest move is the final act of a drama that has been unfolding for several years now. Needless to say it went from bad to worse, while Musharraf became more and more attached to his power. This has to stop, and Benazir Bhutto is right now the only credible person capable of leading a wave of protest. Clearly, Musharraf won't yield a gram of his power unless he is forced to.

Everyone needs to do his or her part. Anyone currently supplying Pakistan's government with money needs to cut the flow. Everyone in any position of power must make it clear that this is the last straw, and one can't toy with martial rule at will, garnishing it with repression. Last but not least, everyone should today support Benazir Bhutto and the forces that struggle for democracy in Pakistan.

The powers play chess, people lose.

The much applauded Rose Revolution that turned Georgia from Shevarnadze's playground into what many believed to be a Western democracy has definitely gone awry. Some suspicions have been brewing in my head right from the beginning of it, seeing the very close ties Saakashvili had with certain Western dipliomats (not least the US Ambassador Richard Miles, who happened to be the ex-US ambassador to Belgrade) and organizations, with George Soros's OSI sponsoring trips to Belgrade for several Georgians.

Despite the suspicions, it could have worked. A government founded on integrity and democracy would have proved that real democracy can indeed root itself in the former Soviet space. The new government, however, has blown these chances by straining relationships with Russia and mismanaging the internal situation. A series of suspicious deaths of critical journalists and ministers, as well as reports of human-rights violations and censorship don't show Saakashvili and his entourage in a positive light.

As much as one can question the veridicity of these conspiracy theories and reports, mass protests against the evils that the government was created to eliminate are not a good sign.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL0315866620071103?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Again, whether these are spontaneous or masterminded is matter for speculation, since Russia still has a lot of power and influence in the region.

Georgia has been turned into a chessboard, and the prize for winning is oil royalties. See, it lies on one of the exit routes for Caspian oil, whose reserves would make the Saudis pale.

Which route can the oil take? Through Russia to the Black Sea and Novorossijsk, through, surprise, Chechnya. Alternatively, through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey (pipeline currently in operation). Or through Iran to Bandar-Abbas. Or Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I spot a pattern: half of the turmoil and over 60% of oil conspiracy theories revolve around this region. I'm not saying this is a fight for the oil. I'm just suggesting that access to natural resources is an excellent reason to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries. Russia and the West do it with equal gusto.

Those who find themselves in the usual lose-lose situation are the ordinary citizens of those countries, caught up in events of a magnitude they can't grasp.

China's just sick!

News of tainted Chinese exports rampaged through the media, and products for domestic consumption aren't safe either. 750 people have been arrested in a crackdown on fake and dangerous products, and the Chinese Government gave enormous prominence to the execution of a bribed official. I am not buying this. A system with no embedded accountability is the best soil for growing corruption and reaping its bitter fruits.

Parents who fed their newborns milk powder with a fraction of the claimed nutrients know this first-hand. We know this first-hand when we get injured by a product that made it to the stores only through currency-stuffed brown envelopes.

I can't be scandalized by the scarce attention paid by many Chinese producers to the safety of the products they peddle us. After all, we're not them, so what do they care.

But even with over a billion inhabitants, not fighting for the life of your own citizens just ain't right. How can one define a statist government that doesn't watch over the safety of the products on the shelves? Which words can describe this horror?

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/06D3F821-6801-40AA-B117-14B23D030A5B.htm

Bad timing in Pakistan

I am puzzled by the situation in Pakistan, no joke. First we have what looks like a military dictatorship that cracks on militants and supports the US War on Terror. Then this same dictatorship turns a bit lax. Then it turns back into hard-on-terrorists mode and it ends in a bloodbath. In the meantime machinations are carried out to bring back exhiled Prime Minister Bhutto (a woman, for a change in a region dominated by islamic countries with doubtful records of women's participation in politics). While the country is plunged into chaos by various constitutional amendments and demonstrations, Islamic militants seize the opportunity and begin wreaking havoc. Bhutto gets her power-sharing deal and returns, only to be greeted by deadly blasts and go back to see family in Dubai while the Supreme Court still has to rule whether there was actually an election.

Thumbs up to Bhutto for standing up to dictatorship and struggling for democracy in Pakistan. But does it come at the right time? The Taliban are more active than ever, seeping into Pakistan and getting the local hotheads excited. This isn't the time to plunge the country into fibrillation and go off on a family visit. Despite their disagreements, Bhutto and Musharraf should have teamed up to fight a common enemy: violent militants. Instead they bicker on who should do what and whether one should dress in a military uniform or in civilian clothes. Come on! Musharraf should definitely quit his army post, but while he's in the top seat his influence should be used for a good cause (and to divert his pressure away from the Supreme Court).

Tis amazing how sometimes bad timing can make a successful reform go awry.